I think the ARM is a threat to Intel due to its flexibility, low cost, and low power reqs. But the ARM isn’t the most wonderful CPU in the world. No CPU maker has ever managed to compete with Intel over the long haul. And I don’t see massive R&D work going on with ARM to improve their technology. Maybe it is happening “behind the scenes”?

I’m betting ARM looks dangerous now, but in 5 or 10 years it will not have kept pace with OS/Application demands and Intel will be standing there with yet another state-of-the-art CPU.

As for Intel, I don’t know what they’re going to do, either. I know that if I were in their shoes, I’d be profoundly concerned about what’s happening in the sub-PC market. As you point out, all smartphones run on ARM. Windows-based tablets seem dead in the water (how many did HP sell of theirs last year? rumor is just a few thousand), while iPad and all the interesting forthcoming tablets are running on ARM as well. Many iPads displace potential netbook sales, and every such displacement is a lost sale for Intel. I suspect you’re right about Intel getting back into the ARM business. They have the resources to buy their way in, effectively sauntering onto the battlefield after fighting has ceased and declaring victory.

As usual, an excellent analysis on your part — thank you!

I am skeptical about ARM on the server, though. The bulk of power consumption in a server comes from RAM and storage, not the CPU itself, and Amdahl’s law limits the power savings from CPU alone. A CPU that has 1/4 the power consumption for 1/2 the speed in a system where the CPUs account for 40% of the power draw yields only a 30% total power savings. In other words you get 1/2 the performance for 70% the power cost. Not a good bargain.

For that second he stood there, my theory is he instinctively was wondering if I “knew something” but I had to tell him I was just joking (even though I was not), then he said “well if you are joking that’s okay”.

I think Intel can afford to put a few thousand engineers on making the best possible ARM processor they can, based on Cortex-A15 or their own custom ARM compatible designs. Intel can afford to make both ARM and x86 at the same time. Just put the choice out there and let the OEMs and customers decide which type they want to use.

This increased competition is a big disruption in any case as their previous very large profit margins are under threat. But so are the profit margins of every other large silicon valley company, perhaps except Google who has a lock on something completely different. Although I also don’t think the future of Google should be focused on ads, I think eventually people will start hating ads, so they have to find ways to make money on cloud computing services some other way, or they too could be in trouble.

http://www.being-anon.it.tc

Microsoft is just as screwed. I’m guessing they design everything by committee there, for there is no other reason I can think of for a company with so much money and so many smart engineers to miss the boat so badly. WP7 is so late and incomplete, they will be lucky to have a 20% share of the smartphone market by the time it matures, and even that will be a major accomplishment. Tablets? What took them so long to respond to the ipad? Are they really delusional to believe windows can compete with iOS and android in that market? Was it just arrogance, or was stupidity involved in their thinking that they could just throw together some cobbled version of windows, and it would compete with purpose-designed OS’s? They’re just lucky the desktop isn’t going to disappear soon, so they have time to re-group as Apple did 10 years or so ago.

In the meantime, where will all that arrogance at Intel and Microsoft go?